Paternalism Disclaimer-- Zero Poker Content

[cero_z]

Hi everyone,

I have a friend who's a resident at a WI hospital. She deals with all types of patients who are in fragile mental and/or emotional states, due to a wide variety of factors (possible mental illness, drug abuse, psychotropic medication, ignorant/abusive upbringing, etc.), and who must make important decisions regarding their own health, and that of their families. Quite often, the choices her patients make in this regard are fairly horrifying to her, and she is tempted to redirect them toward a "better" choice. But, my friend doesn't do this if her patient is deemed mentally competent, because she understands that her role as physician is to apply her medical knowledge to helping her patients in the way that THEY choose, within the range of treatment options that she (and the hospital) offers. To presume to choose for them is to assume a different role: that of a parent, and this is not an appropriate role for her as a physician.

Time was, doctors did this all the time; I'm sure many of you are familiar with the great deference older generations afford their doctors, whose attitudes tend to be, "Don't tell ME what's best for you--I'm the doctor." Some doctors are still this way. But "Paternalism" was a buzzword of sorts during my friend's medical training, and attitudes towards it are changing, which I think is a good thing.

I think we have a little bit of paternalism rearing its head in these forums, as well. Some of the very experienced posters will often respond to a line that a player took by saying, essentially, "this line is only good if you're very skilled, and most people aren't, so it's not a good line." I am guilty of this at times, too; it's difficult to watch someone you'd like to help make some of the same mistakes you've made. Still, I don't think that warning a less experienced player off of a potentially effective new perspective is really doing them a service. Though steering them around risky and unusual approaches to the play of hands may save them a few bucks initially, while they're not experienced enough to navigate the pitfalls, it will also probably encourage them to think inflexibly about poker and thereby hamper their development from a solid player into a great player (which is presumably the goal of many of us here).

So, I'm going to say it now: I like to get loco at the table. I will try things that most players would not attempt (like the sequence of bluffs in my recent post) that go way beyond the bounds of "solid play." When these plays fail, they are VERY expensive and make me look like an idiot. When they succeed, most people still think I'm an idiot; just a lucky one. Either way, this style works for me, and I believe the main reason I pull it off is because I'm pretty good at reading (I'm referring both to "tell" play, and interpreting betting actions). This is the result of a lot of thinking and hard work over the last 5 years, and it does not come easily, in my experience.

So anyway, when I post from now on, know that my "advice" comes from the standpoint of, "I don't know what will work for you, but this is the way I'd approach the problem." You can assume that if I'm posting it here, it's not necessarily a good line for newbies to go out and adopt as their default. It might, however, be a good thing to think about, and to balance with the more standard (and more universally correct) line.

[man]

when I was a senior in high school, there was a freshman that I ran track with who would go balls-to-the-wall on every one of our intervals. I told him that he needed to chill out because he'd start burning out if he wasn't careful. I later realized that discouraging him from running with all his heart was the worst thing I could possibly do as an older runner, and even if he did burn himself out, he'd eventually learn how to pace himself.

whenever I'm berated for using an unorthodox approach, I'm reminded of that kid. I think I can handle the criticism, but I hope that all naive up-and-comers aren't getting discouraged by those kinds of comments.

[gomberg]

Well said - I love experimenting at the table, and a lot of times it does make me look like an idiot - but it keeps the game interesting and being creative and flexible throughout a session is part of the beauty of this game - plus other players start to fear you, which is a nice power trip...

[Voltron87]

cero this is a very good post

[neon]

So true. You know once you win a pot with weird cards or taking an unorthodox line and someone looks at you and says, "you played __ like *that*?" with a mixture of awe and bewilderment, your image will never be the same.

It's funny, really. When I first started playing this game, I absorbed all I could about the standard way of playing: which hands to play from which positions at the table, a good line to take with a flopped set OOP, how to play the nut flush draw on the button.

Now, the only times I use "standard" lines is when I'm either up against someone who plays bad and will pay me off anyway, or versus a good player when I'm bluffing, and employ the basic, ABC line for the hand I'm trying to represent . . .

[KaneKungFu123]

[ QUOTE ]
So true. You know once you win a pot with weird cards or taking an unorthodox line and someone looks at you and says, "you played __ like *that*?" with a mixture of awe and bewilderment, your image will never be the same.

It's funny, really. When I first started playing this game, I absorbed all I could about the standard way of playing: which hands to play from which positions at the table, a good line to take with a flopped set OOP, how to play the nut flush draw on the button.

Now, the only times I use "standard" lines is when I'm either up against someone who plays bad and will pay me off anyway, or versus a good player when I'm bluffing, and employ the basic, ABC line for the hand I'm trying to represent . . .

[/ QUOTE ]

cero, you put alot of thought and analysis into your game, and you are the best poster on this forum.

[coltrane]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe the main reason I pull it off is because I'm pretty good at reading (I'm referring both to "tell" play, and interpreting betting actions).

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a key statement to me.....sometimes I think that reading is pretty much this entire game - that anything is possible upon mastering that skill.....in some post I once glanced through on here, Ray Zee said something to the effect of "[when you can figure out exactly what the other guy has, you can always bet your money in such a way that will always win]", and I remember thinking WOW, that's really this whole game in a nutshell.....

it's funny, reading through a lot of the posts on this forum, I think we sometimes forget that we are GAMBLING (and all that that word entails).....I believe a good gambler is a good gambler - and there is an ESSENCE to being a good gambler (which often times I think has to do with the "heart" of a decision being in the right place - not always the decision itself).....but the way one goes about tapping into that essence can be very unique and personal and very different than someone (or anyone) else.......

we all who dedicate time in our life to absorb this forum do so because in some way we strive to be better gamblers.....it's important for me to remember that from time to time and to remember what I love about doing this.....the freedom, the uncertainty, the ability to embrace and apply unique thought......like it's an art form....like it's a perfect balance of science and art....

[flawless_victory]

i also play quite wild... i think alot of ppl on thiis forum who pay attention will find that surprising bc im always telling ppl to fold...
i like your posts cero... you are my favorite poster, easily.
i am extremely drunk. ciao.

[Niwa]

I dont have much to say except it was a great post.

[mikech]

just to echo some of the other sentiments: great post, and cero is definitely on the short list of the best m/hnl posters.